As is generally well known, counterfeit electronic devices, for example semiconductor components, are a wide-spread problem. When installed in a fully functional product, the counterfeited semiconductor components often malfunction, fail due to environmental conditions, age prematurely, have unwanted functionality and in some cases just don't function at all despite a close electrical match, thus affecting performance of devices and systems that use them and inflicting financial losses due to inadequate performance.
Counterfeit electronic devices can be found in many forms. One major feature linking most counterfeits is that the internal electronics function differently, even in some cases if only very slightly so, than a genuine or authentic part straight off the manufacturing line. If the internal parts of the counterfeit electronics, whether it be a discrete semiconductor, integrated circuit, printed circuit board, circuit board assembly or product are functioning or physically or materially configured differently than authentic electronics the part will give off a different electromagnetic signature.
Prior to the conception and design of the instant invention, efforts have been made to inspect and screen counterfeited electronic components. Many of them are either superficial, extremely expensive or both superficial and extremely expensive. Of superficial techniques, the simplest and most common is visual inspection, but as counterfeits have become increasingly sophisticated these techniques have become less reliable. In contrast, more reliable techniques that can detect some counterfeiting modalities that are in existence are expensive or are destructive in nature.
The different types of inspection techniques under which counterfeit electronic devices can be discovered include: visual external inspection for signs of resurfacing, solvent tests, visual microscopic inspection of encapsulant finish and lead surfaces, and x-ray inspection. During x-ray inspection the internal structure of like date and lot codes of electronic components are examined and compared to known authentic parts and certain types of counterfeit parts can be discovered, but these techniques are limited to physical external differences in the die, wirebonding etc. The less sophisticated counterfeit electronic devices exhibit vast differences in internal structure including, but not limited to, different die frames and different wire bonding. X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy can also be used to confirm component status which is sometimes overlooked by counterfeiters. Decapsulation, which involves the removing of the external packaging from a semiconductor die and exposing the semiconductor wafer or die for microscopic inspection of brand marks, trademarks, laser die etchings, date codes and other defining characteristics can be used to attempt to determine the authenticity of some electronic devices. Again, these techniques focus on the physical characteristics of the material that can be inspected when de-encapsulated and does not provide information regarding the underlying electronic functionality. These techniques are also destructive in nature. Chemical etching techniques which use acid to expose a wafer or die packaged in plastics or resins can likewise expose the internal components for inspection, but are destructive in nature.
Mechanical techniques including sanding, cutting, cracking, or chipping the ceramic or metal to expose wafer or die for inspection are also used with some success, but again result in destruction of the part being inspected. Scanning Acoustic Microscopy can be used to discover evidence of resurfacing and blacktopping by revealing laser etching below blacktop material.
Internal part layout tracing and external packaging curve tracing are other options to determine if the product has the anticipated electrical characteristics.
Electrical tests range from full electrical tests, which are typically expensive, to gross leak and fine lead functional electrical testing.
Applicant's own efforts described in U.S. Ser. No. 13/410,797 filed on Mar. 2, 2012, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PHYSICALLY DETECTING COUNTERFEIT ELECTRONICS”, now published as US 2012-0226463 A1 and U.S. Ser. No. 13/410,909 filed on Mar. 2, 2012, entitled “INTEGRATED CIRCUIT WITH ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY ANOMALY DETECTION AND PROCESSING”, now published as US 2012-0223403 A1 improves inspection and screening of counterfeited electronic components
However, it has been determined that there is a need for a further improved apparatus which not only more efficiently utilizes space in a repetitive testing environment, but offers enhanced RF signal emission gathering capability, space efficient RF shielding for external noise suppression, while improving counterfeit detection capability by modifying input signals to inspect and screen counterfeit electronic devices in a non-destructive manner by utilizing a signature of the radio frequency (RF) energy emitted by such electronic devices.
One challenge is the need to collect emissions content on the part in a manner that shields the measurement from the external environment. To the best knowledge of the Applicant, a means does not currently exist that specifically measures counterfeit part characteristics in an environment that simultaneously minimizes volume, provides favorable RF collection capability and provides shielding from undesirable environmental emissions.